1338 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17455444)
21. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of titanium and yttrium-stabilized zirconium dioxide abutments and implants.
Çaglar A; Bal BT; Karakoca S; Aydın C; Yılmaz H; Sarısoy S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(5):961-9. PubMed ID: 22010077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Effect of framework shape on the fracture strength of implant-supported all-ceramic fixed partial dentures in the molar region.
Tsumita M; Kokubo Y; Vult von Steyern P; Fukushima S
J Prosthodont; 2008 Jun; 17(4):274-85. PubMed ID: 18205740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Effect of diameter and length on stress distribution of the alveolar crest around immediate loading implants.
Ding X; Liao SH; Zhu XH; Zhang XH; Zhang L
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2009 Dec; 11(4):279-87. PubMed ID: 18783411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown.
Sevimay M; Turhan F; Kiliçarslan MA; Eskitascioglu G
J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Mar; 93(3):227-34. PubMed ID: 15775923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Bone-implant interface with simulated insertion stress around an immediately loaded dental implant in the anterior maxilla: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Lee JS; Cho IH; Kim YS; Heo SJ; Kwon HB; Lim YJ
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(2):295-302. PubMed ID: 22442767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Finite element analysis of 2 immediate loading systems in edentulous mandible: rigid and semirigid splinting of implants.
Teixeira MF; Ramalho SA; de Mattias Sartori IA; Lehmann RB
Implant Dent; 2010 Feb; 19(1):39-49. PubMed ID: 20147815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Threaded versus porous-surfaced implants as anchorage units for orthodontic treatment: three-dimensional finite element analysis of peri-implant bone tissue stresses.
Pilliar RM; Sagals G; Meguid SA; Oyonarte R; Deporter DA
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(6):879-89. PubMed ID: 17190297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The biomechanical analysis of simulating implants in function under osteoporotic jawbone by comparing cylindrical, apical tapered, neck tapered, and expandable type implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis.
Xiao JR; Li YF; Guan SM; Song L; Xu LX; Kong L
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Jul; 69(7):e273-81. PubMed ID: 21367505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Probabilistic analysis of peri-implant strain predictions as influenced by uncertainties in bone properties and occlusal forces.
Petrie CS; Williams JL
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2007 Oct; 18(5):611-9. PubMed ID: 17590159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Biomechanical evaluation of tooth- and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with various nonrigid connector positions: a finite element analysis.
Burak Özcelik T; Ersoy E; Yilmaz B
J Prosthodont; 2011 Jan; 20(1):16-28. PubMed ID: 21251117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Influence of material of overdenture-retaining bar with vertical misfit on three-dimensional stress distribution.
Abreu RT; Spazzin AO; Noritomi PY; Consani RL; Mesquita MF
J Prosthodont; 2010 Aug; 19(6):425-31. PubMed ID: 20546493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Influence of bone and dental implant parameters on stress distribution in the mandible: a finite element study.
Guan H; van Staden R; Loo YC; Johnson N; Ivanovski S; Meredith N
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(5):866-76. PubMed ID: 19865627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Influence of the rigidity of a provisional restoration supported on four immediately loaded implants in the edentulous maxilla on biomechanical bone-implant interactions under simulated bruxism conditions: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Yamaguchi K; Ishiura Y; Tanaka S; Baba K
Int J Prosthodont; 2014; 27(5):442-50. PubMed ID: 25191887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Influence of implant number on the biomechanical behaviour of mandibular implant-retained/supported overdentures: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Liu J; Pan S; Dong J; Mo Z; Fan Y; Feng H
J Dent; 2013 Mar; 41(3):241-9. PubMed ID: 23160036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of a cuneiform-geometry implant.
Cruz M; Wassall T; Toledo EM; Barra LP; Lemonge AC
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(5):675-84. PubMed ID: 14579955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Passivity versus unilateral angular misfit: evaluation of stress distribution on implant-supported single crowns: three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Gomes EA; Assunção WG; Barão VA; Delben JA; Rocha EP; de Sousa EA
J Craniofac Surg; 2010 Nov; 21(6):1683-7. PubMed ID: 21119400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Baggi L; Cappelloni I; Di Girolamo M; Maceri F; Vairo G
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Dec; 100(6):422-31. PubMed ID: 19033026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. [Three-dimensional finite element analysis of four-implants supported mandibular overdentures using two different attachments].
Jiang MY; Wen J; Xu SS; Liu TS; Sun HQ
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Jan; 54(1):41-45. PubMed ID: 30630258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. The dynamic natures of implant loading.
Wang RF; Kang B; Lang LA; Razzoog ME
J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Jun; 101(6):359-71. PubMed ID: 19463663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Regular and platform switching: bone stress analysis varying implant type.
Gurgel-Juarez NC; de Almeida EO; Rocha EP; Freitas AC; Anchieta RB; de Vargas LC; Kina S; França FM
J Prosthodont; 2012 Apr; 21(3):160-6. PubMed ID: 22372756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
